Federal Consulting Group August 2004 Department of Labor Civil Rights Center 2004 Satisfaction Study - Recipients.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2007 Annual Conference Survey Says! Collecting Feedback From Customers James Collins.
Advertisements

Campus-wide Presentation May 14, PACE Results.
1 Commonwealth of Virginia Executive Branch Strategic Planning, Service Area Planning, and Performance-Based Budgeting Agency Strategic & Service Area.
Provider Survey Overview Survey is annual CMS requirement DMA administered 2013 survey Link to electronic survey ed to Providers Survey initiated.
Summary of Key Results from the 2012/2013 Survey of Visa Applicants Who Used a Licensed Adviser Undertaken by Premium Research Prepared: July 2013.
Leading the way to open data clarity Inaugural Public Sector benchmark survey on Open Data - February 2013 Media slides.
NETT Recruitment-Admissions Interactive Review Congruence Survey for case study 1 Relationship between recruitment and admissions activity.
1 Program Performance and Evaluation: Policymaker Expectations 2009 International Education Programs Service Technical Assistance Workshop Eleanor Briscoe.
Effect of Staff Attitudes on Quality in Clinical Microbiology Services Ms. Julie Sims Laboratory Technical specialist Strengthening of Medical Laboratories.
Presented at CLEAR’s 23rd Annual Conference Toronto, Ontario September, 2003 Public Accountability – Best Practices Accrediting Your Certification Program.
Community Planning Training 1-1. Community Plan Implementation Training 1- Community Planning Training 1-3.
“Strengthening the National Statistical System of RM” Joint Project By 2011, public institutions with the support of civil society organizations (CSOs)
2014 IT Salary Survey: Security Research Findings © 2014 Property of UBM Tech; All Rights Reserved.
Bluebonnet Elementary School Celebrations and Recommendations for Continuous School Improvement Round Rock Independent School District Module 7 Assignment.
County Scorecard Update NACS Ronnie L. Taylor NGS State Advisor – Branch Chief Brett Howe NGS Headquarters Staff 7 March, 2008 Joe Whitsitt NGS Headquarters.
TNS Proprietary: © Linking Employee Compensation to Survey Metrics High-Level Considerations and Best Practices January, 2006.
Employee Engagement Survey Education Session #3
1 ACSI American Customer Satisfaction Index TM Measuring Satisfaction with Government Using the ACSI Mexico City, September 2009.
NCHRP (47) - MTAP Survey Tool Used to Assess FTA Contractor Performance of State DOT Triennial and Other FTA Reviews - An Update Biennial FTA State.
Collaborating with Business: A Survey of Employers Participating in PWDNET December, 2012 Leah Lobato, Utah State Office of Rehabilitation Carol Ruddell,
Department of Veterans Affairs Organizational Transformation Symposium
State of Maine: Quality Management and National Core Indicators.
Organization Mission Organizations That Use Evaluative Thinking Will Develop mission statements specific enough to provide a basis for goals and.
Tulane University 1 Tulane University Employee Satisfaction Survey Results October 2012.
FY12 Title I Common Program Review Findings Title I Technical Assistance Session May 11, 2012.
UBC Department of Finance Campus Community Customer Service Survey Forum Presentation March 1, 2004.
Archived Information This information has been archived National Partnership for Reinventing Government 1999 Employee Survey U.S. Department of Education.
GSA OGP Advisory Committee Engagement Survey ACES 2004 Overall Results September 23, 2004.
“Changing Culture by Changing the Conversation” May 2000 Drive Change -- Don’t Just Measure It.
Campaign Readiness Project Overview Enabling a structured, scalable approach to customer-centric campaigns.
NASA Earth Observing System Data and Information Systems
1 Commonwealth of Virginia Executive Branch Strategic Planning, Service Area Planning, and Performance-Based Budgeting Agency Strategic & Service Area.
The Reality of Measuring Small Business Environmental Compliance Assistance Kenya Stump.
The link between staff development and student engagement The Robert Gordon University Thursday 4 February 2010 sparqs Student Engagement Series.
IAF Certification/ Registration Bodies’ Member Satisfaction Program September 19, 2003 Final Report Summary.
SASA WEBGRAM State Title I Directors July 27, 2011 Topic: 2011 Grantee Satisfaction Survey Patricia A. McKee Acting Director Student Achievement and School.
ITS Communication Plan: Focus Group & Survey Findings Raechelle Clemmons November 25, 2008.
ADD Perspectives on Accountability Where are We Now and What does the Future Hold? Jennifer G. Johnson, Ed.D.
1 ACSI American Customer Satisfaction Index TM Citizen Satisfaction with the U.S. Federal Government: A Review of 2011 Results from ACSI Forrest V. Morgeson.
TATN Survey Results Statewide Survey Results for Quality Indicators for Assistive Technology Developed and provided by Texas Assistive Technology.
© CFI Group 1 NWS Wind Chill Customer Satisfaction Results: Media Personnel JAG/TI Meeting November 6, 2003.
HIV/AIDS BUREAU 2012 Grantee Satisfaction Survey: Response and Results Tracy Matthews Clinical Unit, Director Department of Health and Human Services Health.
Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics Martha Moorehouse Director, Children and Youth Policy Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning.
Take Charge of Change MASBO Strategic Roadmap Update November 15th, 2013.
ITS Tools for Coordination Mobility Services for All Americans Yehuda Gross USDOT ITS Joint Program Office CalACT 2007 Spring Conference & Expo April 2007.
Amr Hamdy Director, Management Center The American University in Cairo.
2005 Customer Satisfaction Study September 2005 NASA Earth Observing System Data and Information Systems.
1 Research Project Wave 5 Prepared for Customer Insights December 2011.
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD TRB’s Vision for Transportation Research.
T HE G ALLUP O RGANIZATION GSA OGP Advisory Committee Engagement Survey ACES 2004 Overall Results October 14, 2004.
September 21, 2011 OVRD Director’s Report Occupational Information Development Advisory Panel Quarterly Meeting.
2011 ACSI Survey Summary HDF/HDF-EOS Workshop Riverdale, MD April 18, 2012.
Trends and Drivers of Federal Employee Engagement
1 © 2004 ForeSee Results Best Practices for Managing Citizen Satisfaction On Your Website WebShop 2004 July 28, 2004.
Regional Dental Consultants’ Meeting Presented by Emerson Robinson, DDS, MPH Region II and V Dental Consultant.
1 © CFI Group National Weather Service Marine/Tropical Survey Presentation of Customer Satisfaction Results March 16, 2004 Federal Consulting Group.
Evaluation Results MRI’s Evaluation Activities: Surveys Teacher Beliefs and Practices (pre/post) Annual Participant Questionnaire Data Collection.
2009 Annual Employee Survey U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development December 29,2009 (updated January 8, 2010)
Relevance to Distance Education of the Experiential Learning Model William E. Garner, Rh.D., CRC, LPC 1.
ACUI/EBI Assessments Users’ Meeting. Educational Benchmarking, Inc. Number of National Assessments for Higher Education: 65 Number of Colleges/Universities:
The Federal Telework Program U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Assessment in the Workplace Student Affairs Division Meeting October 17, 2012.
ACF Office of Community Services (OCS) Community Services Block Grant (CSBG) Survey of Grantees Satisfaction with OCS Survey of Eligible Entities Satisfaction.
The University of Texas-Pan American National Survey of Student Engagement 2013 Presented by: November 2013 Office of Institutional Research & Effectiveness.
Development Management Customer Satisfaction Survey 2015/16 Economy, Planning and Employability Services Reported Prepared May 2016.
Related to the framework of the State and Federal Accountability Measures Customer Statisfaction with the ACSI.
Aims: EVALSDGs seeks to: promote evaluation activities around the SDGs
End of Year Performance Review Meetings and objective setting for 2018/19 This briefing pack is designed to be used by line managers to brief their teams.
Mark Andrews NOAA Aviation Weather Program Manager October 8th, 2003
2016 Information Seekers Voice of The Customer
Presentation transcript:

Federal Consulting Group August 2004 Department of Labor Civil Rights Center 2004 Satisfaction Study - Recipients

2 Federal Consulting Group Review of the American Customer Satisfaction Index 4A uniform, cross-industry quarterly index of private sector customer satisfaction that was adopted in 1999 as the “gold standard” measure for Federal government agencies. 4Relates expectations and evaluations of quality to customer satisfaction. 4Internationally-accepted measure of customer satisfaction used in over 20 countries. 4Database contains information from over 300,000 customer interviews. 4Produced by a partnership between the National Quality Research Center at the University of Michigan Business School, the American Society for Quality and CFI Group.

3 Federal Consulting Group Why Should Agencies Measure Customer Satisfaction? Link customer satisfaction with expectations and desired outcomes Benchmark against “best” in business and government Set “baseline” for customer satisfaction and measure progress Provide critical information for annual performance plans to Congress (as required under GPRA) Identify areas for improving quality of service provided to customers Raise trust in your agency and the government overall Enable Senior Executive Service members to meet performance criteria Customer Satisfaction

4 Federal Consulting Group 4A component score is a weighted average of the set of attributes, or survey questions, comprising a component or activity. Responses to survey questions are given on a 1-10 scale, which is converted to a scale for score reporting. 4An impact, on the other hand, predicts the increase in satisfaction that would result from a 5-point increase in a component or input score. 4Areas for improvement are those components or activities with a relatively low score and a relatively high impact on satisfaction. Review of ACSI Results In the simplified example shown here, Activity 2 would be a key action area due to its relatively low score and high impact. Component 2 Component Overall Quality 79 Example

5 Federal Consulting Group Customer Segment 4Which Civil Rights Center customer segment was surveyed? The Recipients segment is defined as State level Equal Opportunity Officers that receive information, assistance, training and reviews from the Department of Labor Civil Rights Center. 4How were the Civil Rights Center customers identified? The Civil Rights Center provided a list of names and addresses for the State Equal Opportunity officers that utilize their services. CFI Group sent invitations via to these officers to visit a website to take the Customer Satisfaction survey. Customer surveys were collected continuously from June 7 through July 6, 2004.

6 Federal Consulting Group 79* 4The Civil Rights Center Recipients score is significantly higher than the 2003 national federal government ACSI score of 71. CRC Recipients Results 4The Customer Satisfaction Index for CRC Recipients is… CRC Recipients Federal Government ACSI * The Customer Satisfaction score for the Civil Rights Center Recipients is +/- 4.0 at the 95% confidence level.

7 Federal Consulting Group CRC Recipients Customer Satisfaction Model

8 Federal Consulting Group Detailed Results 4Civil Rights Center Staff received the highest component score. Recipients rated the knowledge and professionalism of the staff exceptionally high (92), while rating the availability of staff slightly lower (84). 4Training is an area of strength for the Civil Rights Center. Recipients feel that CRC is conducting useful training sessions (88) and presenting information that is clear (85). This component has the highest impact on Satisfaction. 4The score for the CRC Website is 77. Recipients rated the usefulness (79) and thoroughness (77) of the information on the website favorably, yet rated the ease of finding information considerably lower (69). 4Recipients rated the Quality of Information they receive from CRC favorably. Usefulness of the information had the highest score (79), while clarity of the information had the lowest score (76).

9 Federal Consulting Group The CSI is derived from three questions dealing with overall satisfaction. Customer Ratings: Customer Satisfaction Index How service provided by the Civil Rights Center meets your expectations How service provided by the Civil Rights Center compares to an ideal institution How satisfied you are with the service provided by the Civil Rights Center

10 Federal Consulting Group Customer Ratings: Training Impact on Customer Satisfaction: 2.6

11 Federal Consulting Group Customer Ratings: Staff Impact on Customer Satisfaction: 0.9

12 Federal Consulting Group Customer Ratings: Website Impact on Customer Satisfaction: 0.9

13 Federal Consulting Group Customer Ratings: Quality of Information Impact on Customer Satisfaction: 0.4

14 Federal Consulting Group Recipients Ratings: Segment Results Received Training vs. Did Not Receive Training Recipients that attended training conducted by the Civil Rights Center rated all components considerably higher.

15 Federal Consulting Group Recipients: Calling CRC Who Recipients talk to at CRC and the Topics Discussed Recipients speak to Tech Advisors, Senior Policy Analyst, and Managers most often. Recipients call to discuss Methods of Administration and General Information most frequently.* * Recipients could indicate more than one topic that they called to discuss, this question was asked as a multiple response question.

16 Federal Consulting Group Desired Outcome 4The Civil Rights Center wants their Recipients to say positive things about the services they provide. This is the desired outcome that was measured in the customer satisfaction survey. r“How willing would you be to say positive things about the Civil Rights Center ?” scored an 89 (impact of 4.1 from CSI) Have not Complained 92%

17 Federal Consulting Group Conclusions and Recommendations Evaluate current Training offerings The Civil Rights Center Website is an area for possible improvements 4 Recipients rated the ease of finding information on the website the lowest of all attributes measured in the survey. However, this is the method they use most to obtain information from the CRC. If possible, provide a clear link to the CRC from the DOL website and organize resources in a more comprehensive manner. Staff should be maintained 4 Keep up the good work! This component has the highest score and a relatively high impact on Satisfaction. Recipients are very satisfied with the interactions they have with CRC staff members. Monitor this area - if scores decline here, scores for Satisfaction will most likely decline also. 4Recipients are very pleased with the training seminars, conferences and workshops that the CRC is conducting. However, not all recipients are able to attend these events. Investigate additional options, such as online and on-site training, so all recipients have access to training.

18 Federal Consulting Group 4Detailed survey results for all of the Federal services, including trends in performance and customer satisfaction, were updated in December 2003 and can be found on the website 4Many agencies share best practices through the interagency customer service forum. Additional Information